Gov. Scott Walker, several journalists and a courageous private-sector employee are among those honored by the 2017-18 Openness Awards, or Opees, bestowed annually by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council. The state Legislature, meanwhile, is being singled out for negative recognition.

The awards, which are being announced today in advance of national Sunshine Week (sunshineweek.org), March 11-17, recognize extraordinary achievement in the arena of open government. This is the 12th consecutive year that awards have been given.

“For more than a decade, the Opees have served to remind state residents that open government is a perpetual struggle, with heroes and villains,” said Bill Lueders, council president. “We need as many of the former as we can get.”

The Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council is a nonpartisan group that seeks to promote open government. It consists of about two dozen members representing media and other public interests. Sponsoring organizations include the Wisconsin Newspaper Association, Wisconsin Broadcasters Association, Wisconsin Associated Press, Wisconsin News Photographers and the Madison Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists.

This resident of the village of Port Edwards in central Wisconsin spent more than 100 hours looking into alleged open meetings and ethics violations by the village board. His complaint to the Wood County district attorney led to the appointment of a special prosecutor and ultimately to a settlement requiring some officials to receive training on the state’s openness laws. Five of the board’s seven members either resigned or were voted out. Terry, who stepped down as Port Edwards’ village administrator in 2015 after 18 years, told USA Today Network-Wisconsin he felt obligated to act, saying the conduct he reported “reflects poorly on all government officials.”

Media Openness Award (“Mopee”): Tim Damos

It was a banner year for this Baraboo News Republic reporter covering public officials in Sauk County who seem allergic to open government. He exposed the intrigue behind one official’s departure and $135,000 contract buyout. He broke stories revealing that Sauk County Board leaders made false sworn statements and that the county’s former highway commissioner solicited NASCAR tickets from a contractor. His paper, based on his reporting, has filed a lawsuit seeking other information, as well as a complaint over a county committee’s failure to adequately provide notice of its discussion about an important personnel issue. Now he’s covering efforts by Sauk County officials to limit public comment at meetings.

Political Openness Award (“Popee”): Scott Walker

Last March, for the second year in a row, Wisconsin’s governor issued an executive order ordering state agencies to improve their performance on open records requests. It directs them to track and post their record response times and limits how much they can charge. It also requires “regular training for all employees and members of all boards, councils, and commissions.” Walker’s efforts in this area, including his executive order in 2016, are much appreciated.

Open Records Scoop of the Year (“Scoopee”): Wisconsin State Journal and Media Milwaukee

Both outlets pushed back against official secrecy to break major stories on sexual harassment. State Journal reporter Molly Beck reported on complaints against four lawmakers, including one that led to a $75,000 settlement, while colleague Nico Savidge exposed weaknesses in the UW-Madison’s reporting procedures and pulled back the veil on multiple accusations involving a particular professor. And UW-Milwaukee student journalists at Media Milwaukee unearthed dozens of allegations of harassment involving professors and other staff, shining a light on an overlooked issue.

Whistleblower of the Year (“Whoopee”): Will Kramer

At the heart of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s remarkable series on the dangers posed by industrial barrel recycling plants was Will Kramer’s courageous refusal to keep his mouth shut while lives were at risk. The industry risk-management and safety consultant, who secretly recorded one plant manager remarking that the drums “could blow up and kill eight people in a heartbeat,” went to the Journal Sentinel after government regulators failed to act. The paper’s resulting “Burned” investigation led to significant fines and safety improvements. Kramer has since left the industry to pursue a law degree.

No Friend of Openness (“Nopee”): The Wisconsin Legislature

The state’s highest legislative body is on record as being “committed to our state’s open record and open government laws and policies.” That’s often hard to tell. This year lawmakers from both parties denied requests for records of sexual harassment investigations and refused to provide electronic records in electronic form. The Republican majority also held secret meetings to hash out budget details, continued to conduct business by using abusive mail ballots and selectively blocked access to their social media accounts. With friends like these….

In my career as a journalist, I have encountered many public officials who respect government openness and transparency.

There was the state records custodian who turned over dozens of her boss’s embarrassing emails after telling him that keeping them secret would violate the law. And the university staffers who pointed me to public information the school tried to keep out of the public eye. And the local elected official who told me what happened in a closed session she thought may have been illegally closed.

As we approach this year’s annual celebration of Sunshine Week, March 11-17, it’s worth recalling times when people entrusted with our tax dollars have stood up for our right to know. But too often government agencies and elected officials pledge fidelity to openness while acting to keep us in the dark. Some recent examples:

The Madison Police Department failed, for more than a year, to deliver records to the Madison weekly Isthmus—even after the newspaper paid the department its requested fee. The liberal weekly and the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty teamed up to sue the department for dragging its feet, and the records were belatedly released. Wisconsin law says records must be provided “as soon as practicable and without delay” but doesn’t spell out how long is too long. More than a year is too long.

State lawmakers, relying on advice from the Assembly and Senate chief clerks, have refused to turn over electronic copies of emails, saying they will provide only printed copies. A judge has already ruled against one lawmaker, a Republican, who was sued over this practice, while another lawmaker, a Democrat, has just been sued.

The state’s bipartisan legislative leadership has denied requests for records related to allegations of sexual harassment in the Legislature on grounds that secrecy protects the victims. Of course, they could just black out victims’ names and still let the public judge the credibility of the allegations and the adequacy of the response, but have refused.

The Madison school district has been less than forthcoming about disturbing allegations against teachers. In one case, a middle school teacher was dismissed after a dispute with a student, but district officials refused to share details. It took a blog post by the Madison police chief to reveal that the teacher allegedly slapped the student. In another case, a high school has refused to share details on student allegations that led to a teacher’s sudden retirement —including whether its investigation substantiated the allegations.

Officials in Sauk County have taken numerous steps to block the public’s right to know. The local newspaper has filed a complaint over vague meeting agenda language that failed to make clear what was going to be discussed. The county also withheld information about health insurance proposals until after a committee decided which option to pick. And it skirted a law requiring the disclosure of finalists for key public jobs, for which it is now being sued.

Taken together, these cases provide a disturbing reminder that the public’s right to know is under constant attack—and that defending it requires constant vigilance.

Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council(www.wisfoic.org), a group dedicated to open government. Council member Mark Pitsch is an assistant city editor at the Wisconsin State Journal and president of the Madison chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists.

A resolution that passed 96-1 affirms that the Assembly “remains committed to our state’s open record and open government laws and policies, and will take all necessary steps to ensure that these laws and policies are preserved without modification or degradation.”

Fast-forward two-and-a-half years: Has the Assembly kept its promise? Here are some recent events to consider.

Among other reasons for withholding the documents, the clerks claimed disclosure would have a chilling effect on employees’ use of the Legislature’s internal complaint process. This position was backed by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and Assembly Minority Leader Gordon Hintz (D-Oshkosh), who argued that releasing records in such cases could reveal the names of victims and witnesses, even when identifying information has been blacked out.

Viewed in the best possible light, these are not unreasonable concerns. But courts in Wisconsin have repeatedly affirmed that disclosing records about alleged misconduct by public officials and employees serves the public interest. And judges have found that victims and witnesses can be protected by redacting identifying information while disclosing the substance of what happened.

That same month, the Assembly passed a bill that blocks release of most police body camera footage. Only recordings depicting deaths, injuries, searches and arrests would be subject to release.

The measure further requires law enforcement agencies to deny requests for video recorded in places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as inside homes, unless all witnesses, victims and property owners sign a waiver consenting to the video’s disclosure.

Open government advocates, including the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, believe the bill unnecessarily hampers access to body camera footage, which the public is paying for. Already, the law allows police to deny release of records when the harm from disclosure outweighs the public interest.

Separately, the Assembly is considering a bill that would seal court records about people wrongfully convicted. The measure, AB 548, effectively turns the public records law on its head by requiring that records be confidential unless a judge finds there is an overriding public interest in access to the documents.

While the aim of the bill is commendable—to help those exonerated rebuild their lives—sealing off all records about wrongful convictions goes too far. Access to such information is essential if the public has any chance at holding prosecutors, judges and the justice system accountable for wrongful prosecutions.

So, to review: The Legislature has refused to release records about personnel and sexual harassment investigations, advanced a bill to restrict access to body cam footage, and is considering legislation to seal off documents about wrongful convictions.

Has the Assembly kept its 2015 commitment to ensure the public records law is “preserved without modification or degradation?” You be the judge.

Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council(www.wisfoic.org), a group dedicated to open government. Council member Jonathan Anderson is a reporter for USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin.

Computers have made examining government records easier than ever. The smallest townships across Wisconsin post the meeting agendas and minutes online. And websites for government agencies at all levels contain an enormous amount of other information.

Electronic records are also available on request. Say you want to see a skate-park-feasibility study you’ve heard about. You can request this record from the agency that keeps it, and receive it via email. The whole process can be completed in minutes.

In the past, such a request might have meant days of waiting for a paper copy with a per-page reproduction cost, as well as postage. A requester might have to first send a check to cover these costs.

Fulfilling requests in a digital fashion benefits both hard-working public employees and the curious public. It saves time and effort. The cost of reproduction is negligible.

There are other advantages in having a record in electronic form. Reading a 50-page paper study takes a long time, but it takes only seconds to search and find a particular phrase within a document on your computer.

And sometimes the paper copy doesn’t tell the whole story. The term “metadata” describes everything in an electronic document that doesn’t appear on a printed page. This may include, say, the name of the file, such as “Secret Meeting Agenda.docx.” Most files also contain the author’s name and information on when it was created and last modified.

In July 2016, the UW System officials refused to release their annual budget proposal, as they had in past years, claiming it had not been finalized. The proposal wasn’t distributed until 90 minutes before the Board of Regents met to take it up, eliminating any chance for public scrutiny. The metadata revealed that no changes had been made to this allegedly unfinished document since six days before the meeting.

Last month a Dane County judge ruled that Rep. Scott Krug (R-Nekoosa) should have supplied more than a thousand emails in digital form because the requester specifically asked for them in that format. Legislative staff had offered more than 1,500 pages of paper printouts for in-person review at an Assembly office, with copies available at 15 cents per page.

The requester who brought the suit was Bill Lueders, president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council. “The records were virtually unusable in the provided hard copy because they could not be searched,” the lawsuit said.

Lueders requested emails that Krug received from constituents on proposed changes to the state’s water laws. To properly fulfill this request, Krug’s office likely located the responsive emails using the search function within their email program, looking for particular phrases and bill numbers.

Shouldn’t we all have the benefit of this convenience? Providing records in piles of paper makes them less usable and requires requesters to physically travel to where the records are located to avoid paying for hundreds and even thousands of pages of copies. The Legislature’s policy discourages inquiry and prevents an easy examination of public information.

If you want records in electronic form, ask for them that way. And that’s how responsible officials will provide them—with or without the intervention of the courts.

Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council(www.wisfoic.org), a group dedicated to open government. John Foust is a Council member and a computer consultant in Jefferson.

State law makes nearly all governmental records open to inspection and copying, and requires custodians to release records “as soon as possible and without delay.”

So how are they doing?

Recently, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty conducted an experiment to see how well school districts are complying with the state’s Open Records Law.

We asked the state’s 20 largest school districts for records from the last two years relating to their compliance procedures and how quickly they fulfilled requests. The results were tabulated in a recent report. Here are some highlights:

The good: Of the 12 school districts that fulfilled our request without charging a fee, six of them (Appleton, Green Bay, Janesville, Racine, Waukesha and West Allis-West Milwaukee) reported response times, on average, of 10 business days or fewer.

Governor Scott Walker, in his 2016 executive order, required state agencies to respond to “small and straightforward requests within 10 business days of receipt.” The order doesn’t bind school districts, but we are happy to see many school districts meeting that deadline anyway. Three other school districts (Fond du Lac, Stevens Point and Sun Prairie) were not far behind, fulfilling requests, on average, within 15 business days.

The bad: Not all districts were so prompt. Middleton-Cross Plains, for example, even though it received only 13 requests over the two-year period, took 16.8 business days, on average, to comply. Oshkosh received only 25 requests, but took almost 20 business days.

Worst of all was Milwaukee Public Schools, with an average response time of 30 business days. While MPS is far larger and receives far more requests than any other school district, the Department of Natural Resources, despite receiving almost 8,000 requests, is able to respond in about 10 business days. The Department of Public Instruction, which has as large of a budget as MPS, responds in about 13 business days.

MPS spends over a billion taxpayer dollars every year; it needs to devote more resources to complying with the Open Records Law.

The ugly: Of the 20 largest school districts, seven (Eau Claire, Elmbrook, Kenosha, Madison, Sheboygan, Wausau and Wauwatosa) would not fulfill our requests without payment. The fees ranged from $15 to, in Madison’s case, more than $1,000.

According to the Madison Metropolitan School District’s attorney, the district does not have a system for tracking open records requests, hence its extremely high fee in this case. While records custodians are allowed to charge for locating records, school districts that need so much time to locate records are apparently not doing a good job of tracking requests. It should not be so hard to find out how well any government entity complies with the law.

The takeaway: Walker’s executive order led to measurable improvements in the response time of state agencies. School districts and other local governments can use the same processes, including better training and tracking systems, to achieve similar improvements.